A comparison of animated versus static images in an instructional multimedia presentation

C. J. Daly, J. M. Bulloch, M. Ma, D. Aidulis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Sophisticated three-dimensional animation and video compositing software enables the creation of complex multimedia instructional movies. However, if the design of such presentations does not take account of cognitive load and multimedia theories, then their effectiveness as learning aids will be compromised. We investigated the use of animated images versus still images by creating two versions of a 4-min multimedia presentation on vascular neuroeffector transmission. One version comprised narration and animations, whereas the other animation comprised narration and still images. Fifty-four undergraduate students from level 3 pharmacology and physiology undergraduate degrees participated. Half of the students watched the full animation, and the other half watched the stills only. Students watched the presentation once and then answered a short essay question. Answers were coded and marked blind. The “animation” group scored 3.7 (SE: 0.4; out of 11), whereas the “stills” group scored 3.2 (SE: 0.5). The difference was not statistically significant. Further analysis of bonus marks, awarded for appropriate terminology use, detected a significant difference in one class (pharmacology) who scored 0.6 (SE: 0.2) versus 0.1 (SE: 0.1) for the animation versus stills group, respectively (P = 0.04). However, when combined with the physiology group, the significance disappeared. Feedback from students was extremely positive and identified four main themes of interest. In conclusion, while increasing student satisfaction, we do not find strong evidence in favor of animated images over still images in this particular format. We also discuss the study design and offer suggestions for further investigations of this type.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)201-205
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education
Volume40
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2016

Fingerprint

Multimedia
Students
Narration
Pharmacology
Motion Pictures
Terminology
Blood Vessels
Software
Learning

Cite this

@article{163024d3c21a496481e57053b752e1e3,
title = "A comparison of animated versus static images in an instructional multimedia presentation",
abstract = "Sophisticated three-dimensional animation and video compositing software enables the creation of complex multimedia instructional movies. However, if the design of such presentations does not take account of cognitive load and multimedia theories, then their effectiveness as learning aids will be compromised. We investigated the use of animated images versus still images by creating two versions of a 4-min multimedia presentation on vascular neuroeffector transmission. One version comprised narration and animations, whereas the other animation comprised narration and still images. Fifty-four undergraduate students from level 3 pharmacology and physiology undergraduate degrees participated. Half of the students watched the full animation, and the other half watched the stills only. Students watched the presentation once and then answered a short essay question. Answers were coded and marked blind. The “animation” group scored 3.7 (SE: 0.4; out of 11), whereas the “stills” group scored 3.2 (SE: 0.5). The difference was not statistically significant. Further analysis of bonus marks, awarded for appropriate terminology use, detected a significant difference in one class (pharmacology) who scored 0.6 (SE: 0.2) versus 0.1 (SE: 0.1) for the animation versus stills group, respectively (P = 0.04). However, when combined with the physiology group, the significance disappeared. Feedback from students was extremely positive and identified four main themes of interest. In conclusion, while increasing student satisfaction, we do not find strong evidence in favor of animated images over still images in this particular format. We also discuss the study design and offer suggestions for further investigations of this type.",
keywords = "3D animation, cognitive load, 3-dimensional, animation",
author = "Daly, {C. J.} and Bulloch, {J. M.} and M. Ma and D. Aidulis",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1152/advan.00053.2015",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "201--205",
journal = "American Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education",
issn = "1043-4046",
publisher = "American Physiological Society",
number = "2",

}

A comparison of animated versus static images in an instructional multimedia presentation. / Daly, C. J.; Bulloch, J. M.; Ma, M.; Aidulis, D.

In: American Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 40, No. 2, 01.06.2016, p. 201-205.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of animated versus static images in an instructional multimedia presentation

AU - Daly, C. J.

AU - Bulloch, J. M.

AU - Ma, M.

AU - Aidulis, D.

PY - 2016/6/1

Y1 - 2016/6/1

N2 - Sophisticated three-dimensional animation and video compositing software enables the creation of complex multimedia instructional movies. However, if the design of such presentations does not take account of cognitive load and multimedia theories, then their effectiveness as learning aids will be compromised. We investigated the use of animated images versus still images by creating two versions of a 4-min multimedia presentation on vascular neuroeffector transmission. One version comprised narration and animations, whereas the other animation comprised narration and still images. Fifty-four undergraduate students from level 3 pharmacology and physiology undergraduate degrees participated. Half of the students watched the full animation, and the other half watched the stills only. Students watched the presentation once and then answered a short essay question. Answers were coded and marked blind. The “animation” group scored 3.7 (SE: 0.4; out of 11), whereas the “stills” group scored 3.2 (SE: 0.5). The difference was not statistically significant. Further analysis of bonus marks, awarded for appropriate terminology use, detected a significant difference in one class (pharmacology) who scored 0.6 (SE: 0.2) versus 0.1 (SE: 0.1) for the animation versus stills group, respectively (P = 0.04). However, when combined with the physiology group, the significance disappeared. Feedback from students was extremely positive and identified four main themes of interest. In conclusion, while increasing student satisfaction, we do not find strong evidence in favor of animated images over still images in this particular format. We also discuss the study design and offer suggestions for further investigations of this type.

AB - Sophisticated three-dimensional animation and video compositing software enables the creation of complex multimedia instructional movies. However, if the design of such presentations does not take account of cognitive load and multimedia theories, then their effectiveness as learning aids will be compromised. We investigated the use of animated images versus still images by creating two versions of a 4-min multimedia presentation on vascular neuroeffector transmission. One version comprised narration and animations, whereas the other animation comprised narration and still images. Fifty-four undergraduate students from level 3 pharmacology and physiology undergraduate degrees participated. Half of the students watched the full animation, and the other half watched the stills only. Students watched the presentation once and then answered a short essay question. Answers were coded and marked blind. The “animation” group scored 3.7 (SE: 0.4; out of 11), whereas the “stills” group scored 3.2 (SE: 0.5). The difference was not statistically significant. Further analysis of bonus marks, awarded for appropriate terminology use, detected a significant difference in one class (pharmacology) who scored 0.6 (SE: 0.2) versus 0.1 (SE: 0.1) for the animation versus stills group, respectively (P = 0.04). However, when combined with the physiology group, the significance disappeared. Feedback from students was extremely positive and identified four main themes of interest. In conclusion, while increasing student satisfaction, we do not find strong evidence in favor of animated images over still images in this particular format. We also discuss the study design and offer suggestions for further investigations of this type.

KW - 3D animation

KW - cognitive load

KW - 3-dimensional

KW - animation

U2 - 10.1152/advan.00053.2015

DO - 10.1152/advan.00053.2015

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 201

EP - 205

JO - American Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education

JF - American Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education

SN - 1043-4046

IS - 2

ER -